Dubai Forums Dubai Discussions Dubai Politics Talk Philosophy and Religion Forums

Strewth!

I just wish the Pope's script-writer could have chosen a more appropriate quote and not one that he does not agree with the content and which historians (and of course muslims) agree is incorrect.

The tragedy is that this was all a predictable outcome.

My view is that the Pope needs to just come out and stop all the bad vibes by saying:
1. He does not agree that everything the Prophet, pbuh, brought that was new was evil and inhuman
2. He does not agree that Islam was spread by the sword, or that the Quran teaches this.

This will diffuse the situation. Currently we have an apology that stops short of clarifying whether the Pope agrees with the above.

A couple of observations:
1. 'Muslims should read the full speech' - agree, but note that most people, Muslims and non-Muslims, won't - and will read the headlines. "Pope says 1 and 2 above" is what will be the reaction to the speech and non-Muslims may think there is a grain of truth, whilst Muslims know there isn't. Result - an apparent 'clash of civilisations'!

2. Religion has caused the most wars and death. I disagree - most wars are about territory and the resultant wealth that comes from control. Religion has been misused as a divisive badge, but it would be unfair to say that the majority of people killed in wars historically have been because of religion. But if we do keep score, historically the most aggressive and bloodthirsty 'religious' armies have been those under the command of Rome - the period of the Crusades and generally the Dark Ages were trully horrific in terms of Human Rights abuses in the name of religion.

Cheers,
Shafique

shafique wrote:Strewth!

I just wish the Pope's script-writer could have chosen a more appropriate quote and not one that he does not agree with the content and which historians (and of course muslims) agree is incorrect.

The tragedy is that this was all a predictable outcome.

My view is that the Pope needs to just come out and stop all the bad vibes by saying:
1. He does not agree that everything the Prophet, pbuh, brought that was new was evil and inhuman
2. He does not agree that Islam was spread by the sword, or that the Quran teaches this.

This will diffuse the situation. Currently we have an apology that stops short of clarifying whether the Pope agrees with the above.

A couple of observations:
1. 'Muslims should read the full speech' - agree, but note that most people, Muslims and non-Muslims, won't - and will read the headlines. "Pope says 1 and 2 above" is what will be the reaction to the speech and non-Muslims may think there is a grain of truth, whilst Muslims know there isn't. Result - an apparent 'clash of civilisations'!

2. Religion has caused the most wars and death. I disagree - most wars are about territory and the resultant wealth that comes from control. Religion has been misused as a divisive badge, but it would be unfair to say that the majority of people killed in wars historically have been because of religion. But if we do keep score, historically the most aggressive and bloodthirsty 'religious' armies have been those under the command of Rome - the period of the Crusades and generally the Dark Ages were trully horrific in terms of Human Rights abuses in the name of religion.

Cheers,
Shafique

Ahem.....well Shaf I guess not all babarians were in west......many barbarians were in east too.......like mongolians and when islamic arnies invaded iran....ppl fled ....

sniper420 wrote:

shafique wrote:Strewth!

I just wish the Pope's script-writer could have chosen a more appropriate quote and not one that he does not agree with the content and which historians (and of course muslims) agree is incorrect.

The tragedy is that this was all a predictable outcome.

My view is that the Pope needs to just come out and stop all the bad vibes by saying:
1. He does not agree that everything the Prophet, pbuh, brought that was new was evil and inhuman
2. He does not agree that Islam was spread by the sword, or that the Quran teaches this.

This will diffuse the situation. Currently we have an apology that stops short of clarifying whether the Pope agrees with the above.

A couple of observations:
1. 'Muslims should read the full speech' - agree, but note that most people, Muslims and non-Muslims, won't - and will read the headlines. "Pope says 1 and 2 above" is what will be the reaction to the speech and non-Muslims may think there is a grain of truth, whilst Muslims know there isn't. Result - an apparent 'clash of civilisations'!

2. Religion has caused the most wars and death. I disagree - most wars are about territory and the resultant wealth that comes from control. Religion has been misused as a divisive badge, but it would be unfair to say that the majority of people killed in wars historically have been because of religion. But if we do keep score, historically the most aggressive and bloodthirsty 'religious' armies have been those under the command of Rome - the period of the Crusades and generally the Dark Ages were trully horrific in terms of Human Rights abuses in the name of religion.

Cheers,
Shafique

Ahem.....well Shaf I guess not all babarians were in west......many barbarians were in east too.......like mongolians and when islamic arnies invaded iran....ppl fled ....

Excellent point^. Shafique, what happened to the Christian communities in North Africa and the Zoroastrian religion in Iran?

Guys, guys - I was pointing out what the score card would be if we tallied up the deaths caused by religious wars. The Crusades were a sustained period of offensive actions instigated by the Church and lasted a number of centuries. Add to that the forced conversions in Spain and slaughters there and elsewhere in Europe and the scales get very heavy indeed.

Mongolians did not wage religious wars (correct me if I'm mistaken here) - and their rampaging took place before the leaders accepted Islam. In fact they attacked the then muslim empire.

Christians of North Africa were allies of the Muslim empire and Abysinnia was never invaded. Zoroastrians in Iran(Persia) weren't, to my knowledge, attacked by Muslim armies and forced to convert or massacred - but it appears valkyrie is thinking of a specific examples when mentioning these two people. I am interested in hearing your view and the comparison with the examples I give above for 'Christian' aggression.

(the problem with history is that there is so much of it! , so the request for enlightenment is genuine, let's discuss. )

Cheers,
Shafique

PS I see the Pope has apologised personally now. Let's hope it puts an end to the strife now.

valkyrie wrote:

sniper420 wrote:

shafique wrote:Strewth!

I just wish the Pope's script-writer could have chosen a more appropriate quote and not one that he does not agree with the content and which historians (and of course muslims) agree is incorrect.

The tragedy is that this was all a predictable outcome.

My view is that the Pope needs to just come out and stop all the bad vibes by saying:
1. He does not agree that everything the Prophet, pbuh, brought that was new was evil and inhuman
2. He does not agree that Islam was spread by the sword, or that the Quran teaches this.

This will diffuse the situation. Currently we have an apology that stops short of clarifying whether the Pope agrees with the above.

A couple of observations:
1. 'Muslims should read the full speech' - agree, but note that most people, Muslims and non-Muslims, won't - and will read the headlines. "Pope says 1 and 2 above" is what will be the reaction to the speech and non-Muslims may think there is a grain of truth, whilst Muslims know there isn't. Result - an apparent 'clash of civilisations'!

2. Religion has caused the most wars and death. I disagree - most wars are about territory and the resultant wealth that comes from control. Religion has been misused as a divisive badge, but it would be unfair to say that the majority of people killed in wars historically have been because of religion. But if we do keep score, historically the most aggressive and bloodthirsty 'religious' armies have been those under the command of Rome - the period of the Crusades and generally the Dark Ages were trully horrific in terms of Human Rights abuses in the name of religion.

Cheers,
Shafique

Ahem.....well Shaf I guess not all babarians were in west......many barbarians were in east too.......like mongolians and when islamic arnies invaded iran....ppl fled ....

Excellent point^. Shafique, what happened to the Christian communities in North Africa and the Zoroastrian religion in Iran?

what happedn to cristain communiteis in NA?

shafique wrote:Guys, guys - I was pointing out what the score card would be if we tallied up the deaths caused by religious wars. The Crusades were a sustained period of offensive actions instigated by the Church and lasted a number of centuries. Add to that the forced conversions in Spain and slaughters there and elsewhere in Europe and the scales get very heavy indeed.

Mongolians did not wage religious wars (correct me if I'm mistaken here) - and their rampaging took place before the leaders accepted Islam. In fact they attacked the then muslim empire.

Christians of North Africa were allies of the Muslim empire and Abysinnia was never invaded. Zoroastrians in Iran(Persia) weren't, to my knowledge, attacked by Muslim armies and forced to convert or massacred - but it appears valkyrie is thinking of a specific examples when mentioning these two people. I am interested in hearing your view and the comparison with the examples I give above for 'Christian' aggression.

(the problem with history is that there is so much of it! )

Cheers,
Shafique

I never said chri$tianity was a good relgion, it has more blood on its hands than islam does. I'll get back to your specific questions later.

http://voi.org/books/siii/index.htm

Site i found on google...

valkyrie wrote:I never said chri$tianity was a good relgion, it has more blood on its hands than islam does. I'll get back to your specific questions later.

http://voi.org/books/siii/index.htm

Site i found on google...

I'll have a look at the site later.

Looks like we agree in terms of who has more blood on it's hands. Where we might disagree though is whether Christianity is a good religion - I believe it is a good religion at it's core - but it has been misused for wars. This applies to Islam as well.

Cheers,
Shafique

lest bring back the glorious 'crusade' end of story

Well much of the media is to blame for this fiasco, as they did not quote the whole of his speech, or the rest of the quote which the Pope was refering to, which puts the 1 sentence or so into context, which says that religion should be taught through peaceful methods and not through violence.

I am hardly biased towards Christianity, seeing as I blame all religions for the problems in the world today, and I totally agree with Kanelli, that the world without religion would be a better place.

After all you do not have to have religion to have faith!

Chocoholic wrote:Well much of the media is to blame for this fiasco, as they did not quote the whole of his speech, or the rest of the quote which the Pope was refering to, which puts the 1 sentence or so into context, which says that religion should be taught through peaceful methods and not through violence.

I am hardly biased towards Christianity, seeing as I blame all religions for the problems in the world today, and I totally agree with Kanelli, that the world without religion would be a better place.

After all you do not have to have religion to have faith!

kanelli's an dchoco's concept is called communism which utterly failed.

No it's not communism at all Sniper, communism is a totally radical and horrid way to run things, clearly you don't know the difference. Just because you don't have religion doesn't make you a communist.

And there are far more important things to get angry and upset about than a few silly words, for goodness sake, some people need to grow a tougher skin and start caring about the real problems in the world, instead of getting angry and violent over a few words - way to go to undo the sterotypes, again and again certain groups just keep on proving that they don't know any other way to deal with things, it's pathetic.

Yep, here we go, as expected the typical fanatical reaction! - From Sky News:

Gunmen shot dead an Italian nun at a children's hospital in Mogadishu in an attack that was linked to the Muslim backlash provoked by a speech by the Pope.

The Catholic nun was blasted three times in the back.

She was rushed to hospital but died in the treatment room.

Her bodyguard was also killed in the attack, which took place in the capital, Mogadishu.

One suspect was quickly arrested by Islamist militiamen who control the capital, witnesses near the scene said.

A high-level Islamist source linked the attack to the controversy over Pope Benedict XVI's recent remarks about holy wars, which have been taken by many Muslims as an attempt to portray their religion as innately violent.

"SOS hospital is assisted by the Catholic Church and the slain aid worker was a nun," the source said.

"There is a very high possibility the people who killed her were angered by the Catholic Pope's recent comments against Islam."

In Rome, Vatican spokesman Rev Federico Lombardi called the nun's murder "a horrible episode", Italian news agency ANSA said.

"We are following with concern the consequences of this wave of hate, hoping that it does not lead to grave consequences for the church in the world," he said.

Sniper, where have I ever mentioned communism? You are making wild assumptions yet again.

Shaf, good points as usual.

I said in my original post the world would be more peaceful and safe without religion and I still believe it. Religion is not the sole cause of conflict, but it is one cause that is avoidable. People should respect other religions, but they don't. Look at India for example - there is inter-religious fighting going on and people are being killed every few months in attacks.

If the Christians and Muslims do decide to have at it, I will be pretty annoyed. I don't want to have any part of their feuds.

Sadly K, people like you and me would get dragged into it anyway, as we would automatically be branded 'infidels'.

I am so sad that a nun has been killed because of over-reactions to the Pope's speech.

I wonder if Muslims are now going to be as vicious as the Israelis were over the past couple of months in Lebanon.

this will go the same way as the cartoons

kanelli wrote:I am so sad that a nun has been killed because of over-reactions to the Pope's speech.

I wonder if Muslims are now going to be as vicious as the Israelis were over the past couple of months in Lebanon.

I think you will find that all Muslim leaders and Muslims around the world will condemn the killing of the nun. There is no justification for this and the person who did this was not acting according to Islam.

I'm slightly surprised at kanelli's last comment - but let us wait and see if anything approaching what happened in Lebanon transpires as a result of the Pope's comments. Let's revisit after a month, say, and then judge whether the comment is fair to the Lebanese who suffered horrendously.

Cheers,
Shafique

Shaf, I'm surprised if you thought I was slighting the Lebanese in any way, because I wasn't. My point is that some Muslims have acted violently in the wake of the Danish cartoons and now the Pope speech fiasco, so are they not equally as guilty of over-reacting as some people accuse the Israelis of doing when they perceive a threat to their beliefs, which is their homeland?

kanelli wrote:Shaf, I'm surprised if you thought I was slighting the Lebanese in any way, because I wasn't. My point is that some Muslims have acted violently in the wake of the Danish cartoons and now the Pope speech fiasco, so are they not equally as guilty of over-reacting as some people accuse the Israelis of doing when they perceive a threat to their beliefs, which is their homeland?

Over a thousand Lebanese were killed and over a hundred Israelis were killed in the action. I think it is slightly insensitive to those who suffered on both sides to equate a war where people were killed and a country destroyed with the reactions of a perceived insult to a religion.

One nun has been killed and the cause hasn't yet been officially linked to the Pope's message (two people are in custody for the killing).

Therefore, with all due respect, I'm surprised you are suprised at my surprise. But then again, perhaps I am wrong and the people around the world will 'over react' and act like the Israelis. Let us wait and see.. let's see on the 17th October how many people have been killed etc.

Cheers,
Shafique

How am I being insensitive? I said the Israeli army were vicious in the defence of their right to maintain a homeland. I also think that some Muslims are being vicious in their defense of Islam. Each one over-reacted and has been violent and murderous in order to protect their strong beliefs. There may not be 1000 nuns murdered, but there could be other attacks coming on Christians in general all over the world in light of the reaction to the Pope's speech. Yes, let's wait and see. I hope I am wrong.

Christians seem to be more capable of handling criticism and humour about their religion, so I doubt that the Pope's speech and subsequent uproar will cause a huge stir amongst the Christian population and make them murderous in defence of the Pope or Christianity. Let's see. I suppose there could always be a few nutters out there...

shafique wrote:

kanelli wrote:Shaf, I'm surprised if you thought I was slighting the Lebanese in any way, because I wasn't. My point is that some Muslims have acted violently in the wake of the Danish cartoons and now the Pope speech fiasco, so are they not equally as guilty of over-reacting as some people accuse the Israelis of doing when they perceive a threat to their beliefs, which is their homeland?

Over a thousand Lebanese were killed and over a hundred Israelis were killed in the action. I think it is slightly insensitive to those who suffered on both sides to equate a war where people were killed and a country destroyed with the reactions of a perceived insult to a religion.

One nun has been killed and the cause hasn't yet been officially linked to the Pope's message (two people are in custody for the killing).

Therefore, with all due respect, I'm surprised you are suprised at my surprise. But then again, perhaps I am wrong and the people around the world will 'over react' and act like the Israelis. Let us wait and see.. let's see on the 17th October how many people have been killed etc.

Cheers,
Shafique

In trying to play devils advocate here, i think Shaf, you have misread K's comment. She was merely making a comparison between the Isreali Reaction towards Leb and a Muslim reaction to the pope's comment. In summary both reactions were totally "unwarranted".

I really dont read what you read into this Shaf and i certainly dont think it was insensitive in the least.

just my 2p's worth.

You all don’t get it do you.

I am really disappointed and saddened by some of the replies here. Is this what u all conclude that religion is the cause of conflict, and are turning to become atheists and Goths and Hippies or whatever.

And the question still remains. Why?

Why did the pope choose to mention and insult the Prophet PBUH ?

All I can say right now is that I wish we had a worthy and admirable leader, a leader who could stand up to all the atrocities committed against Muslims and Islam. And the way things are going I don’t think that leader is very far away.

I will add a few verses from the Holy Quran and the Hadith about Jesus please try to understand it.

In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful

"And when Allah said: O Isa (Jesus), I am going to terminate the period of your stay (on earth) and cause you to ascend unto Me and purify you of those who disbelieve and make those who follow you above those who disbelieve to the day of resurrection; then to Me shall be your return, so l will decide between you concerning that in which you differed." 03:055

"So peace is on me the day I was born, the day that I die, and the day that I shall be raised up to life (again)" 019.033

"Such (was) Jesus the son of Mary: (it is) a statement of truth, about which they (vainly) dispute." 019.034

Narrated Abu Hurayrah: The Prophet (peace be upon him) said: "There is no prophet between me and him, that is, Jesus (peace be upon him). He will descent (to the earth). When you see him, recognise him: a man of medium height, reddish fair, wearing two light yellow garments, looking as if drops were falling down from his head though it will not be wet. He will fight for the cause of Islam. He will break the cross, kill swine, and abolish jizyah (tax). Allah will perish all religions except Islam. He will destroy the Antichrist (dajaal) and will live on the earth for forty years and then he will die. The Muslims will pray over him." Sunnan Abu Dawud 37:4310

xibit wrote:You all don’t get it do you.

I am really disappointed and saddened by some of the replies here. Is this what u all conclude that religion is the cause of conflict, and are turning to become atheists and Goths and Hippies or whatever.

And the question still remains. Why?

Why did the pope choose to mention and insult the Prophet PBUH ?

All I can say right now is that I wish we had a worthy and admirable leader, a leader who could stand up to all the atrocities committed against Muslims and Islam. And the way things are going I don’t think that leader is very far away.

I will add a few verses from the Holy Quran and the Hadith about Jesus please try to understand it.

In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful

"And when Allah said: O Isa (Jesus), I am going to terminate the period of your stay (on earth) and cause you to ascend unto Me and purify you of those who disbelieve and make those who follow you above those who disbelieve to the day of resurrection; then to Me shall be your return, so l will decide between you concerning that in which you differed." 03:055

"So peace is on me the day I was born, the day that I die, and the day that I shall be raised up to life (again)" 019.033

"Such (was) Jesus the son of Mary: (it is) a statement of truth, about which they (vainly) dispute." 019.034

Narrated Abu Hurayrah: The Prophet (peace be upon him) said: "There is no prophet between me and him, that is, Jesus (peace be upon him). He will descent (to the earth). When you see him, recognise him: a man of medium height, reddish fair, wearing two light yellow garments, looking as if drops were falling down from his head though it will not be wet. He will fight for the cause of Islam. He will break the cross, kill swine, and abolish jizyah (tax). Allah will perish all religions except Islam. He will destroy the Antichrist (dajaal) and will live on the earth for forty years and then he will die. The Muslims will pray over him." Sunnan Abu Dawud 37:4310

Whether you agree or not has no relevance. Religion has been the root cause of the majority of the unrest and wars and killing since the time when relgion first existed. This is not soley confined to Islam, it affects every single religion you can name.

In our bible and i am sure Shaf can quote me correct if i am wrong, isn't there a verse in the Lords Prayer that says

"forgive those that trespass against us"

It would be so nice if all religions including Islam, adopted this.

From where i stand, most religions write reams and reams about this that and the other, but the followers totally disregard anything that is actually written.

It very nice to see that the jews are having a bit of a rest bit

kanelli wrote:Christians seem to be more capable of handling criticism and humour about their religion, so I doubt that the Pope's speech and subsequent uproar will cause a huge stir amongst the Christian population and make them murderous in defence of the Pope or Christianity. Let's see. I suppose there could always be a few nutters out there...

There are many Christians who passionate about their religion and protest against what they see as wrong. Many of the pro-life activists in the States who have committed violence against abortion clinics are Christian and cite Christianity as their motivation for their violent stances.

There have been protests about the depiction of Jesus Christ and alleged insults against his character - the latest of which was for the Da Vinci code.

I support all people's rights to protest and would not characterise the believing Christians as 'nutters' for protesting against the fiction of Dan Brown. I don't agree with the protests, but I would not say they don't have the right.

I'd like to ask a question that I'd like you to ponder over and then reflect on what you have written above. Of all the protests around the world that have been reported against the Pope's remarks, do you think these numbered more or less than the worldwide protests and demonstrations against the Da Vinci Code?

Some countries banned the film because of the protests. Some demonstrations got violent.

At the end of the day people get emotional if what they hold dear gets insulted. Muslims are no better and no worse than Christians when it comes to defending the rights of what they hold dear. The difference is that there are far more 'nominal' Christians than their are believing and practicing Christians - to the point where in many societies a 'born again Christian' is taken to be a derogatory term applied to someone who people think have lost reason and 'found religion'.

I know you kanelli and do not think you would intentionally post words that could be construed as racist or Islamophobic. However, some of the posts above seem to be characterising Muslims as less civilised than Christians who would take equivalent comments in good humour. I don't think this assertion stands up to scrutiny when we examine the facts - Christians have their fair share of people who are passionate about their religion and who will protest when their faith is insulted - even in fiction.

Arnie - I still don't see how one can equate the protests thus far with the war in Lebanon, sorry. One nun being killed in Sudan does not make a war - but is a reprehensible crime that all the Muslim protestors around the world will condemn as a crime.

Arnie is right the Lords prayer does say, "forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who tresspassed against us". For my part the Pope has now apologised and said he did not believe in the quote, I forgive him. For the record, the Quran requires Muslims to cease hostilities immediately after the other side calls a truce or is no longer a threat. Similarly the Prophet, pbuh, was the exemplar when it came to forgiving those who had persecuted him and the Christians - see the quote from the historian about the conquest of Mecca in the letter to newspapers I posted in this thread.

Religious wars have killed less people than non-religious wars, and were it not for God-fearing rulers, more people would have been killed. That is my view of historical wars and have yet to see any evidence for the oft-cited notion that religions cause more harm than good. I respect people's right to say this view of theirs, but forgive me if I don't agree with it without some evidence.

And a final thought for the night..

This thread and others in this forum show indeed how powerful words can be - even when they are just written down and not spoken and broadcast to the whole world! There is a lesson in this and we should think on what we write/say.

Cheers,
Shafique

kanelli wrote:How am I being insensitive? I said the Israeli army were vicious in the defence of their right to maintain a homeland. I also think that some Muslims are being vicious in their defense of Islam. Each one over-reacted and has been violent and murderous in order to protect their strong beliefs. There may not be 1000 nuns murdered, but there could be other attacks coming on Christians in general all over the world in light of the reaction to the Pope's speech. Yes, let's wait and see. I hope I am wrong.

Sorry, I went back and re-read this.

"Each one over reacted and has been violent and murderous"

You are saying that Muslim protests have been violent and murderous and can be likened to the Israeli bombing of Lebanon. You also say that you don't see why this might be viewed as being insensitive towards Lebanese.

That is an interesting view point. It is not one I would have made looking at the news, but as you say there could be many attacks on Christians as a result of the Pope's words.

I too hope you are wrong and wait and see - on this point we agree.

Cheers,
Shafique

kanelli wrote:Christians seem to be more capable of handling criticism and humour about their religion, so I doubt that the Pope's speech and subsequent uproar will cause a huge stir amongst the Christian population and make them murderous in defence of the Pope or Christianity. Let's see. I suppose there could always be a few nutters out there...

well ui am errrrrrrrrr was a catholic and 90% of ppl dont even follow the commandments whcih are basic basic foundations of religion.

Secondly most of theattacks occur in third world countries like somalia where there are many unemployed ppl who dont have any work or crap to do and follow the mullahs there in contrast most of the christian lands are in west are developed but still occasionally we do hear mosque being vandalised and other incidents cos there are morons on both sides

Chocoholic wrote:I dont' care if I get flamed for this, I'm going to say it anyway! It was not the Pope's opinion, he was quoting from another text, rightly or wrongly. However the reaction from the Islamic world is once angain nothing more than ridiculous, with threats to kill the Pope, down with the Vatican etc etc etc.

Do you ever see Westerners or Christians reacting in such a way over fanatical Islamic 'clerics' calls for the killing and destruction of the western world - NO!!!!

Get over it!

I will not flame you, but will tell you are WRONG. The pope is entitled for what he said, and he is entitled for his citations. Note also that the reaction of the islamic world (governments and major organizations) can be summarized as: please give us an apology.

Islamic clerics do NOT call for the destruction of the west. So do not classify the islamic world by someone who does so. I'm not classifying the West by those who killed a Sikh man after 9 11 because he was wearing a turban. I'm also not classifying the west by those who caused damages to mosques after some Muslims have been arrested in Toronto in an alleged terror plot.

Finally, your words "once again" and "Get over it!" are impolite. seeking apology is a political norm, just as in the case of Mel Gibson's apology.

MS wrote:

Chocoholic wrote:I dont' care if I get flamed for this, I'm going to say it anyway! It was not the Pope's opinion, he was quoting from another text, rightly or wrongly. However the reaction from the Islamic world is once angain nothing more than ridiculous, with threats to kill the Pope, down with the Vatican etc etc etc.

Do you ever see Westerners or Christians reacting in such a way over fanatical Islamic 'clerics' calls for the killing and destruction of the western world - NO!!!!

Get over it!

I will not flame you, but will tell you are WRONG. The pope is entitled for what he said, and he is entitled for his citations. Note also that the reaction of the islamic world (governments and major organizations) can be summarized as: please give us an apology.

Islamic clerics do NOT call for the destruction of the west. So do not classify the islamic world by someone who does so. I'm not classifying the West by those who killed a Sikh man after 9 11 because he was wearing a turban. I'm also not classifying the west by those who caused damages to mosques after some Muslims have been arrested in Toronto in an alleged terror plot.

Finally, your words "once again" and "Get over it!" are impolite. seeking apology is a political norm, just as in the case of Mel Gibson's apology.

agreed